Ahskance

Actually, the Heal Buff disproportionately affects the CV's planes. After 2 buffs, planes become nearly impossible to kill with continuous damage. This can allow CVs like the Hakuryu to circle an isolated target and get a full 6 attacks off on it... the current CV design is balanced around planes being breakable and this ranked season cracks that balance in half. I ranked out with a 67% winrate. Make sure you're using fighters, because planes are incredibly hard to kill late game. Try to inspire your teammates to have an AA buddy. They only need one additional ship to provide enough AA to retain the balancing concept CVs are based on. Those two things can be incredibly effective at boosting your winrate.

Absolutely. I was more generously describing the 1/100 battles derp that happens. This dude sounds like a completely different story.

Sometimes your finger lands on the W key when the planes didn't take off. The ship goes full ahead while you're thinking "Stupid planes" and sending them up, then taking off. Now your ship is charging ahead while your mind is elsewhere and can result in sad times. Not saying the person in question was fully above-board, but saying the "full-ahead into... what? WHAT? CRAP! Grrr :\" ...does happen from time to time <.<

Woo, ranked out <3 Thanks to TNG for having an angry rant-filled "Ranked Salt Mine" to sit in and slog it out in. Having some other folks around helped keep the drive alive.

I've enjoyed talking with you over Discord. You're a fun guy to have a conversation with. On the forum, however, you like to stir up the muck and bring out the trolls. Are you truly surprised that you've butted heads with a community manager?

Gaming companies have learned to be exceptionally tight-lipped, while trying to feel as talkative as possible. Happa's reference is more to indicate that he tries his best to talk freely with people instead of trying to word-game and maneuver around topics. Trying to say he's inferring that everyone else is untrustworthy is childish :\ This is also childish :\ Happa works weekends, dude. The guy is obviously trying very hard, and to sit there and say "Uh, it's your JOB. SUCK IT UP!" is really childish :\ Happa is one guy. The community is MORE than one person. Do you honestly expect that Happa is happy to be held hostage by any and every person on the internet with an opinion about something? He is literally asking "Please keep this focused so we can focus intently on this." How is this hard to understand?

Current balance is 2 strikes single target, 1-1.5 strikes double target, 0-1 strike triple target. Previous AA had some ships that had double-triple the amount of AA that is currently held. Any AA overlap made it a no-fly-zone, CV immune, no player interaction. ----- Current AA means that if two ships link up, the group is not CV immune, but the CV is going to lose resources to make the attack run. I have to say the current AA situation is the correct thing to do, as making AA more powerful means any overlap just becomes problematic. At present, CVs are "tuned" to lose as many planes as they attack with ("use three, lose three") and can sustain that lossrate for a significant amount of time (10-15 minutes). Increasing the lossrate makes CV unsustainable (which is ok) and causes the player to make hard choices (attack or not attack). ----- 1) Should you be able to attack any ship at least once? a: Absolutely. There is no reason to deny player-interaction. Some ships cause more resource loss than others, but no single ship should be plane-immune, just as no surface ship should be damage-immune. 2) if so, is that literally just once? a: It can be, and that's perfectly ok. If part of a ship's strengths is it's strong AA, then so be it. The Freisland is very strong against planes and can only be struck a single time before you have to bail out. You will lose many planes to be able to do that, but it IS possible (which is good). b: Or do you mean, only able to be attacked once over the entire length of the game? That's a bizarre concept that I don't think they can implement. It could be done with color coding ships that have been struck, but I can't envision a way to make the art/UI fit in the Gameworld. 3) once per type of plane? a: Every type of plane has strengths and weaknesses. While every plane should be able to make an attack, there is no reason to say that type of attack is required to succeed. Aerial Torp'ing Italian Cruisers is a miserable experience. As is trying to AP Bomb open water cruisers that had a functional rudder. b: Or do you mean, only able to be attacked once over the entire length of the game? See previous answer, but also why would this be something useful? Or rather, why would knowing "I can only be attacked once by each type of plane, and then I'm damage immune" be a good concept for gameplay? 4) once per 3 runs of a fighter group? a: I'm assuming you mean like, you can't focus on a single ship for repeated strikes? You have to hit 2 other targets before you could attack the first again? It would be far easier to just grant a ship a form of mathematic damage mitigation for follow-on attacks. Example: a) 1st bomb run deals 100% of strike damage. b) 1 stack of 60 second behind the scenes 50% damage reduction window starts c) 2nd bomb run deals 50% reduced damage as it is performed during the reduced damage window d) 2nd stack of 60 second behind the scenes 50% damage reduction window starts e) 3rd bomb run deals 75% (1/2 x 1/2) reduced damage as it is performed during the reduced damage window Conclusion: This might be something they could look into for DDs as a bit of aerial protection? It might be useful for reducing the outright punishment of isolated players, but it also removes the -accomplishment- of the CV from identifying a victory condition and then executing on it. It would be like a form of "broadside protection" meaning the first salvo on a broadside target can citadel, but others are reduced some way. I don't believe you should remove the success of the player that is punishing positioning errors just to make the one caught out feel less abused.

Only had a 10 point Captain on mine and rarely touched it. Thanks for the correction!

Some things to remember and factor. 1) Fires cannot re-light on a section of hull while an existing fire is there. Were others HE spamming your target and setting fires (and preventing you from setting them too)? When you set a fire, did you continue to spam that same area while the fire burned instead of hitting a different section of hull? 2) As to raw damage, the Smolensk cannot achieve penetration on any part of a T8 to T10 Battleship with HE except the superstructure. Everywhere except the superstructure has a minimum of 32mm plating, which cannot be penetrated even with IFHE on the Smolensk. Were you focusing the majority of your shells at the superstructure? 3) Base fire chance on a Smolensk is 8%. Using both Fire Chance flags increases that to 9%. On average, a Tier 10 Battleships has around a 50% reduced chance to have a fire break out (this is anecdotal and may be more like a 60% reduction?). This would drop your Fire Chance from 9% down to 4.5%. So for 200 shell hits, on non-burning areas, you should statistically expect 9 fires. This could be reduced further by the "Fire Prevention" Captain Skill and the Damage Control mod in slot 2.

@Sumseaman Only works for "on-ship" consumables. So your Aircraft Carrier will receive +1 Defensive Fighter consumable.

Spooter Plane Ohio~

1) Tier 9 BBs 2) You don't have to own optional ships. They are literally releasing a Tier 10 tech tree style of ship in a patch from now.

As I stated in the post above yours: "There is no Unique Upgrade that is decried as patently unfair on this forum, which is about as ringing an endorsement of "eh, balanced enough" from the playerbase as you're going to get." ----- It'd be one thing if you could preview the loading screen of the match you will be put into and think "Hrm… do I take Des Moines variant A or variant B? Ah yes... the open water Des Moines is much better here, I'll choose that." In the absence of that, you're just queueing up with a thing and the battle's gonna go however it's gonna go.

I realize that's what you're talking about. It's the -way- that you're talking about it that just comes off as bizarre. As though your friends will be forever nerfed and the game isn't worth anything until such time as you are assured how and when they return. It's just... dramatic.